3 ms·

Except that humans are destroying the ecosystem. It is quantitatively what is happening around us. A documentary is intended to document, if you don't like wh

Except that humans are destroying the ecosystem. It is quantitatively what is happening around us. A documentary is intended to document, if you don't like what is beung documented that sounds like a you problem?

stakhanov 4y ago
But the space of facts that are true facts is vast, and there's a selection process, and there is no objectively correct way to make that selection, only subjective choices that some people are making, and they have decided that "humans are destroying the ecosystem" is a fact that I need to be bombarded with. It's also a fact that the universe is vast, violent, and indifferent, with our planet being nothing but an insignificantly tiny spec in the fabric of the galaxy. It's also a fact that our planet has seen many epochs come and gone before the anthropocene, and will produce many more epochs after it, bringing forward new and different kinds of life after humanity is long gone. To make it look like we, humanity, are big and mighty in relation to nature, and nature is fragile and timid and needs the good ones among the humans to protect it from the bad ones among the humans: This is not facts. It's spin. Now don't get me wrong: I think every single one of the sustainable development goals [1], including the environmental ones, is a no brainer, and something I can get behind. But it's also a normal function of the human psyche that one doesn't want to be bombarded with cognitive dissonance-inducing messaging all the time, and I want creators of mass media to respect that. Now, it's difficult to make a newscast reporting on the war in Ukraine without inducing cognitive dissonance. But it would be perfectly possible to make a nature documentary that way, and, somehow, mass media aren't doing it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals

stakhanov 4y ago

But the space of facts that are true facts is vast, and there's a selection process, and there is no objectively correct way to make that selection, only subjective choices that some people are making, and they have decided that "humans are destroying the ecosystem" is a fact that I need to be bombarded with. It's also a fact that the universe is vast, violent, and indifferent, with our planet being nothing but an insignificantly tiny spec in the fabric of the galaxy. It's also a fact that our planet has seen many epochs come and gone before the anthropocene, and will produce many more epochs after it, bringing forward new and different kinds of life after humanity is long gone. To make it look like we, humanity, are big and mighty in relation to nature, and nature is fragile and timid and needs the good ones among the humans to protect it from the bad ones among the humans: This is not facts. It's spin. Now don't get me wrong: I think every single one of the sustainable development goals [1], including the environmental ones, is a no brainer, and something I can get behind. But it's also a normal function of the human psyche that one doesn't want to be bombarded with cognitive dissonance-inducing messaging all the time, and I want creators of mass media to respect that. Now, it's difficult to make a newscast reporting on the war in Ukraine without inducing cognitive dissonance. But it would be perfectly possible to make a nature documentary that way, and, somehow, mass media aren't doing it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals